If the topic is, "I will no longer support gaming company X because they support cause Y", then the question, "What's the problem with cause Y?" is directly relevent to the topic and essential to meaningful conversation, and also apparently banned as not directly relevant to gaming. Hence the problem with Pundit's whole attitude to politics in the main forum.
The real, hard boundary can't be explicitly defined, and amounts to, "Pundit will know it when he sees it."
Which is why I believe the rule should either be free-for all, or everything political to Pungency.
Greetings!
Yeah, I agree with you, Sable Wyvern. Either free for all, or everything political goes in Pungency. For myself, since despite Pundit's efforts at "clarification" it still seems murky and uncertain. I'm supposed to scrutinize every aspect of every conversation I'm in--and also shuffle and worry about if any response I make is somehow to be determined as "Inappropriately Political"? Thanks, but no thanks. I'll just keep my commentary Rated G in the main forum.
I honestly like the gunslinger syndrome even in the main forum. Like I have often made the analogy, when you get together with friends at a bar for wings, beer, and cigars, who stands over your shoulder telling you that you can't talk about A or B? No one does that. One of the main refreshing aspects of this site has been that feeling of freedom. Conversations flow and move about as people talk. It's how people talk. To somehow police everyone's speech just seems so unnatural to me. If someone gets into a tangent argument with someone else in a thread, well, fuck 'em, they get ban hammered if the discussion is political? As we have been experiencing, what aspect of our life, society, and culture, ISN'T POLITICAL? Everything is political. Everything has political roots and ramifications.
So, I get that some of the more political arguments may get annoying--they do for me as well, at times--I believe having a more free for all policy is better.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK